danbabcock@eklektik.UUCP (/dev/ph1) (05/25/90)
grr@cbmvax (George Robbins) wrote: >It has - the extra pair of sockets is there only to support ROMS/EPROM with >mutually incompatible pinouts. They are very likely to dissapear on >production systems. I hope it's the nonstandard pinout that disappears and not the other! I don't understand why the 500/2000 uses a nonstandard pinout; what's the motivation? Secondly, since you have to make two sets of ROMs anyway (a 16-bit version and a 32-bit version), there's no reason to choose an incompatible pinout for the 3000's ROMs (i.e. backward compatability is not an issue). Could you please clarify? (thanks!) -- Dan Babcock Internet: danbabcock@eklektik.pgh.pa.us People/Link: DANBABCOCK Phone: (412)-373-1753
grr@cbmvax.commodore.com (George Robbins) (05/27/90)
In article <3276@eklektik.UUCP> danbabcock@eklektik.UUCP (/dev/ph1) writes: > grr@cbmvax (George Robbins) wrote: > > >It has - the extra pair of sockets is there only to support ROMS/EPROM with > >mutually incompatible pinouts. They are very likely to dissapear on > >production systems. > > I hope it's the nonstandard pinout that disappears and not the other! > I don't understand why the 500/2000 uses a nonstandard pinout; what's the > motivation? Secondly, since you have to make two sets of ROMs anyway > (a 16-bit version and a 32-bit version), there's no reason to choose > an incompatible pinout for the 3000's ROMs (i.e. backward compatability > is not an issue). Could you please clarify? (thanks!) I'm not sure what you mean by non-standard. The ROM pinout used in the A500 and A2000 is the one used by all of the Japanese ROM vendors, who are/were the only ones offering masked ROM in 16-bit x 128K format. When the current crop of EPROM's in the same class came out, the EPROM vendors chose not to make their pinouts conform to this pre-existing defacto standard. So, for pre-production systems we need to support both, although in the long term, the ROM pinout will prevail. Perhaps the EPROM vendors will see the light if they wish to promote socket-level interchangability. -- George Robbins - now working for, uucp: {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!grr but no way officially representing: domain: grr@cbmvax.commodore.com Commodore, Engineering Department phone: 215-431-9349 (only by moonlite)
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (05/29/90)
In article <3276@eklektik.UUCP> danbabcock@eklektik.UUCP (/dev/ph1) writes: >I hope it's the nonstandard pinout that disappears and not the other! How do pick which one is standard? Since we've been using the standard pinout, as dictated by Japan, Inc. since before there WERE EPROMS in the 128K x 16 or 256K x 16 package, I claim that the ROM pinout IS the standard. Intel can come along any time they please, I suppose, and choose a different pinout, but that is not going to make it the standard. It's unfortunate they didn't see fit to use the already existing pinout for the EPROMs, but it's something we'll have to live with. We do expect the majority of A3000s to have ROMs in them. "The great thing about standards is that there are so many of them" >-- Dan Babcock -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy "I have been given the freedom to do as I see fit" -REM
p554mve@mpirbn.UUCP (Michael van Elst) (06/02/90)
In article <11907@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax (Dave Haynie) writes: > "The great thing about standards is that there are so many of them" Standards, they are fun Let's make another one. :-) -- Michael van Elst UUCP: universe!local-cluster!milky-way!sol!earth!uunet!unido!mpirbn!p554mve Internet: p554mve@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de "A potential Snark may lurk in every tree."